390
submitted 9 months ago by ozoned@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

VideoLAN @videolan App Stores were a mistake. Currently, we cannot update VLC on Windows Store, and we cannot update VLC on Android Play Store, without reducing security or dropping a lot of users... For now, iOS App Store still allows us to ship for iOS9, but until when?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 142 points 9 months ago

Reminder that VLC is on F-Droid

[-] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 51 points 9 months ago

They've not updated it there either though. It seems to be less of a case of can't update Android and more of a case of won't update Android

[-] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 63 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

From their Twitter:

If you wonder why we can't update the VLC on Android version, it's because Google refuses to let us update:

  • either we give them our private signing keys,
  • or we drop support for Android TV before API-30, and all our users on TV API<30 can't get fixes.

It's not much, just dozens of millions of people use Android TV before Android-11...

Maybe we should tell users to buy new TVs? #electronicWaste

I can't speak to why they're not updating on FDroid but seeing as how it's much more difficult to get people to use FDroid on Android TV, I don't think it will help them with that issue anyway.

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 89 points 9 months ago

Google requiring their private signing key is insane, and goes completely against the concept of private/public keys.

Why is Google asking for this?

[-] Synnr@sopuli.xyz 36 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

See also: NSA PRISM

Member when all the companies listed released a PR statement within 24 hours of each other, all very basic and denied allowing the NSA direct access to their users?

I member.

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 11 points 9 months ago

Oh yeah, I remember that...

[-] Kindness@lemmy.ml 26 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

C-I-A Confidentiality, Integrity, Accessibility. They don't need the keys for C or A. Only one option remains. To modify the code and pass it off as code VLC wrote or signed off on.

Likely to install malware and re-sign. Brazen identity theft.

Maybe I'm wrong, they could use VLC's private keys to gobble encrypted communications too.

[-] DemBoSain@midwest.social 8 points 9 months ago

I didn't know F-droid was on Android TV, but it will be on mine pretty soon.

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 45 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

What exactly is the issue preventing them from updating the Android version?

Also, if that's the case, it sounds like "App stores were a mistake" is a bit misleading, since the particular app store isnt the problem.

[-] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 60 points 9 months ago

Basically, modern app stores have changed how they work and now require the signing keys, VLC feel this is a bad thing and refuse to update. Banks are okay with it, but VLC feel more strongly than banks.

[-] taladar@sh.itjust.works 93 points 9 months ago

Banks are okay with it, but VLC feel more strongly than banks.

I mean banks are known for horrible security practices all around so that makes perfect sense.

[-] soloner@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago
[-] DemBoSain@midwest.social 24 points 9 months ago

My bank restricts the length of my password to...16 characters, I think.

[-] scutiger@lemmy.world 27 points 9 months ago

Mine only uses a 4-to-6 digit pin as a password, and sms for 2fa

[-] Kindness@lemmy.ml 14 points 9 months ago

Darren Kitchen from Hak5 has an amusing story about a bank teller who assured him email was entirely fine to send sPII through. "No sir, you just need to send it to us, and once we have your information then it'll be secure." No encryption. So, yes.

Also look into the Equifax security breach. Un-patched software for months.

It makes almost no sense to have a password length limit. 1_000_000, that's One Million, characters is equal to 1MiB. That's twice the length of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and much less than most modern webpages. After hashing, which is how passwords should be stored, text length is irrelevant. All hashed inputs come out the exact same length. 65 characters for SHA256.

Very much known for their horrible security practices, yes. Absolutely.

[-] gartheom@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Setting a max password length is sometimes done to prevent ddos attacks. Without it, attackers could just spam 1MB passwords constantly and force the login server to just spend all its cpu time hashing garbage.

That being said, a password limit of under 20 characters probably just means they are just storing passwords in plaintext.

[-] ICastFist@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago

In Brazil, the govt owned lottery site, created around 2015, only accepts passwords with 6 numeric digits. Your password has to be a number between 000000 and 999999. Only somewhat recently (6 months ago or so) they've added a 2FA through an email link.

Oh, said lottery is run by the biggest govt owned bank. Chances of people reusing their bank password there are very fucking high.

[-] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

Absolutely. They are entrenched in their regulations so much that it takes forever to change things.

Years ago, I had an account at an american big4 bank with an 8 character password and was going through and making all my passwords unique. I was changing everything to random strings of 20-30 characters (this isnt the best practice, btw, but still better than 8chars), so when I get to this bank account it capped me at 15chars. I couldnt believe the forced low entropy they gave me for something as vital as a bank account.

I asked them why, and basically they said their system would break with anything over 15chars.

How many wrong guesses were you allowed before the system would lock your account?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
[-] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

Who do you think makes the decisions for a bank?

The person writing the Android app?

Or the person who just wants customers to be able to access the app and use the services?

[-] soloner@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Banks have laws and regulations that they must abide by to secure the access to and information of customer accounts. A security team will surely have to sign off on whatever the app developer or customer experience manager wants to implement.

Banks have laws and regulations that they must abide by

Wait, did i step into an alternate universe? Did i escape the shadow realm? I'm free! I escaped the worst timeline!

How do y'all spell berenstain?

[-] Lojcs@lemm.ee 18 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Isn't that how fdroid worked for a long time?

Edit: although it doesn't make sense to me for play store to do the same without the source code available

Edit 2:

The reason is that they forced new apps AND apps for Android TV to use App Bundles https://developer.android.com/guide/app-bundle This type of release cannot be installed as it but can be used to generate the apk files. In order to do so, the Play Store has to sign on the fly.

Not buying it. They could let the dev sign evey combination before uploading. They'll be caching them anyways

[-] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 24 points 9 months ago

Traditionally Fdroid signs every app. Not with the developers key. The future are reproducible builds. https://f-droid.org/2023/01/15/towards-a-reproducible-fdroid.html this is a futuristic app store, not what google has.

[-] flappy@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago

Uploading your signing keys sounds like Windows uploading your bitlocker keys

[-] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago

Banks probably don't use it google's signing process.

[-] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Banks aren't run by the people that develop the apps. They have no idea what a signing key is, they just want the app available and updated.

[-] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

In addition to the private key thing, the Play Store is requiring them to drop support for APIs older than API 30 unless they provide the key.

Which in effect means VLC can no longer be updated on AndroidTVs running Android 11 or earlier.

Which is millions of customers, according to VLC

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

VLC don't update on Fdroid, Fdroid compile all the apps on their repo (the one that comes with the app). Fdroid do some checks on the updated app before they compile it, so it's always a little behind the main release.

Edit: it could also be that VLC haven't yet released the updated app (and in particular its source), so Fdroid have nothing to work with.

[-] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 1 points 9 months ago

I just feel it doesn't make sense to moan unless you have releases you're unable to deploy.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 7 points 9 months ago

Last update 2/23/23 what am I missing?

[-] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 5 points 9 months ago

It's the same version that's on the Play Store.

[-] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 months ago

Which is current according to their site, 3.5.4

I can't read archive.is links

[-] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 2 points 9 months ago
[-] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago

I am not trying to argue but what is the issue? The site shows the same release as F-Droid.

[-] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 3 points 9 months ago

Ugh, I'm biased and so I don't really want to answer but will try. According the VLC, the reason for them becoming so terrible as a media player is because they can't update their app. Now as you and me can both clearly see, the latest version available is the version that is in the app store and on F-Droid. If they were crying about not being able to update and had a version or two that they were unable to upload, it would make sense. But nope, they have nothing beyond what they have. Add to that, if you look at their forums, lots of people have been raising issues. One very handsome man even posted this in October

VLC was once the best in class. Not only was it a great piece of legacy software, the Android team were so passionate that they took that reputation and all the expectations that go along with it and exceeded it.

But as time has gone on, it's just started to languish. If you attempt to rewind a few too many times, the video freezes and you get audio. You can't play a folder on a NAS without creating a playlist. You play a folder locally without VLC losing its place. Every time the screen goes off, it needs to scan the device anew. And despite being at the forefront of Holo Design and Material Design 1, it's yet to implement Material You.

It feels like VLC for Android has been forgotten...

To which their response was to ask for logs, despite the fact that the issues can be reproduced on every device I've ever tried.

[-] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 9 months ago

I play NAS(smb) folders without a playlist all the time, but the rest are issues I have experienced.

load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2024
390 points (96.0% liked)

Privacy

32492 readers
590 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS